Skip to main content

About your Search

20130113
20130121
SHOW
STATION
CSPAN2 3
LANGUAGE
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3 (some duplicates have been removed)
CSPAN
Jan 13, 2013 1:00pm EST
just can't overcome those kind of deficits by providing a head s.t.a.r.t. education program. -- head start education program. so that's where the book began, and most of the people who advised me said, well, it's a very interesting book, i'm sure you'll get on fox tv. and that was not my goal. my goal was not to be a critic. so i said, well, okay, let me do part two of the book, at least to calm people down and say there are some social programs that are really quite effective. -- and maybe we can learn a lesson from that. and the big quiz that in the course of writing the book i conducted with and bored to death my wife and my children was let me sit down with everybody i know and say tell me the three government programs that have been the most effective in, say, the last 65 years. almost every one of my academic friends would say head start, and i would say, wrong. no evidence that it works. the most effective government programs in sort of chronological order; social security, the g.i. bill of 1944 and medicare in 1965. now, there will be some pushback about that. even "usa today
CSPAN
Jan 13, 2013 11:15am EST
in that regard, and they haven't experience environmental problems. and with new york's budget deficit, it seems obvious that hydrofracking is the way to go. and, of course, governor cuomo is free to set whatever regulations he wants about that to ensure the safety of quality and other things that residents are concerned about. i would say that the project should proceed. it's brought benefit to other states. there's no reason that new york should be left behind. >> okay. right in front. wait for the mic a fun. >> you get very good examples of unsuccessful creations of new green jobs. had also looked at elimination of existing jobs like really good cost-benefit analysis done for regulations? >> the cost-benefit analysis for mercury was a travesty. if you look at the cost-benefit analysis carefully, all the benefits from reducing mercury came from getting rid of particulates and particulates were not the focus of that particular regulation. and what was interesting is the benefits focus on additional days of school. in other words, a few days of schools miss, two days of work missed because of lo
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3 (some duplicates have been removed)